The Anglo Saxon Chronicle

Originally compiled on the orders of King Alfred the Great, approximately A.D. 890, and subsequently maintained and added to by generations of anonymous scribes. The original language was Anglo-Saxon (Old English), but these later entries are essentially Estuary English in tone. You could say, this is an EU "Withdrawalist, Libertarian and generally reactionary blog. Regular, but amateurish"(if often a tad infantile).

Monday, February 28, 2011

Feel free to copy, there is no copyright on an Anoneumouse montage.
(click on image to enlarge)

Lord Justice Munby and Mr Justice Beatson

A Christian couple morally opposed to homosexuality because of their faith have lost a landmark High Court battle over the right to become foster carers.

Eunice and Owen Johns, aged 62 and 65, from Oakwood, Derby, went to court after a social worker expressed concerns when they said they could not tell a child a "homosexual lifestyle" was acceptable.

The Pentecostal Christian couple had applied to Derby City Council to be respite carers but withdrew their application, believing it "doomed to failure" because of the social worker's attitude to their religious beliefs.

They asked judges to rule that their faith should not be a bar to them becoming carers, and the law should protect their Christian values.

But Lord Justice Munby and Mr Justice Beatson ruled that laws protecting people from discrimination because of their sexual orientation "should take precedence" over the right not to be discriminated against on religious grounds. The Johns are considering an appeal

Well, the Johns should go for it…

By way of the Human Rights Act 1998 Section 11 Safeguard for existing human rights.

A person’s reliance on a Convention right does not restrict—

(a) any other right or freedom conferred on him by or under any law having effect in any part of the United Kingdom; ........

The High Court should be reminded that the 39 articles of religion as found in the book of common prayer is still good law in this country.

Article 37 of the 39 Articles of Religion is quite clear.

"The King's Majesty hath the chief power in this Realm of England, and other his Dominions, unto whom the chief Government of all Estates of this Realm, whether they be Ecclesiastical or Civil, in all causes doth appertain, and is not, nor ought to be, subject to any foreign Jurisdiction".

The Thirty - nine Articles of Religion were drawn up by the church in convocation in 1563

Subscription to them by the clergy was ordered by act of Parliament in 1571. The Subscription (Thirty-Nine Articles) Act (1571), 13 Elizabeth, Cap. 12

The 39 Articles can be found in the Book of Common Prayer, which has not been repealed and are part of the British constitution through the Act of Settlement 1701 and the Act of Union with Scotland 1707

Oh yes, and the Clergy of the Church of England are still required to acknowledge that the Articles are "agreeable to the Word of God," CANON C15 OF THE DECLARATION OF ASSENT

EU commission set to take charge at BBC

When entering upon their duties they shall give a solemn undertaking that, both during and after their term of office, they will respect the obligations arising therefrom and in particular their duty to behave with integrity and discretion as regards the acceptance, after they have ceased to hold office, of certain appointments or benefits. In the event of any breach of these obligations, the Court of Justice may, on application by the Council or the Commission, rule that the Member concerned be, according to the circumstances, either compulsorily retired in accordance with Article 216 or deprived of his right to a pension or other benefits in its stead.

The power of The Seige Perilous is twofold.

First off, upon initial discovery, there is an almost magical moment where the world stops, the mind languishes in a state of 'cognitive dissonance', and things that were once commonplace now seem tinged with an almost alien peculiarity.

Once the observer is able to truly comprehend what has happened, a second mental state begins to emerge.

Rational behavior would dictate that the SHIT on top of the toilet seat should be disposed of by flushing it down the toilet. But, given the placement of the SHIT, we now have The Seige Perilous, how exactly is this to be accomplished?

Line up for the Bahrain Grand prix

Feel free to copy, there is no copyright on an Anoneumouse montage.
(click on image to enlarge)

Citizen Revolution spreads to Greece

The Greek government is struggling to implement austerity measures, along with a series of other economic restrictions, imposed on Greece by the undemocratic European Union and International Monetary Fund.

However, like Libya's Colonel Gaddafi a Greek Police spokesman said about 3,000 security officers are ready in the streets to prevent the demonstrations from sliding into destructive violence. "We have already taken increased security measures," BBC

Monday, February 21, 2011

When all else fails

Feel free to copy, there is no copyright on an Anoneumouse montage.
(click on image to enlarge)

climate science mathematics

In Climate Science, to observe something, you have to create it. Now this sounds scarily close to bullshit. But if it is bullshit, then at least it's bullshit with equations.

Where A= a quantity and B= a quantity and C=a quantity and BS =Bullshit

Here is the formula that defines bullshit:

A+B+C = DA+B+C+BS=BSand BS is not equal to D

The significance of this formula is that even when you solve the variables A. B and C once you add BS to it your answer is also BS. Simply adding the bullshit factor completely destroys your ability to solve the equation that would otherwise be represented by the value D.

The charter does not extend the ability of the [European] Court of Justice, or any court or tribunal of the United Kingdom, to find that the laws, regulations or administrative provisions, practices or action of the United Kingdom are inconsistent with the fundamental rights, freedoms and principles that it reaffirms.

In particular, and for the avoidance of doubt, nothing in Title IV of the charter creates justiciable rights applicable to the United Kingdom, except in so far as the United Kingdom has provided for such rights in its national law.

The effect of this protocol essentially is that the charter cannot be used to challenge current UK legislation in the courts or to introduce new rights in UK law. Therefore the Charter of Fundamental Rights is not to be justiciable in British courts or alter British law’.